IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v6y2018i1p117-144.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does the Conceptualization and Measurement of Democracy Quality Matter in Comparative Climate Policy Research?

Author

Listed:
  • Romy Escher

    (Department for Political Science Research Methods, Institute of Political Science, University of Regensburg, Germany)

  • Melanie Walter-Rogg

    (Department for Political Science Research Methods, Institute of Political Science, University of Regensburg, Germany)

Abstract

Previous empirical research on democracy and global warming has mainly questioned whether democracy contributes to climate protection. However, there is no consensus in the theoretical literature on what institutional traits of democracy are crucial for climate policy. Thus, results based on indices that summarize multiple democracy quality dimensions could be misleading, as their effects could balance each other out or hide the relative importance of each institutional trait. This article examines whether the analysis of the effects of democracy quality dimensions, measured by separate indicators, contributes to a better understanding of cross-national variance in climate policy compared to the focus on the regime type difference, measured by democracy quality measures. Compared to earlier research, the results indicate that the positive effect of democracy on commitment to climate cooperation depends on the realization of political rights. We find little to support the claim that democracy quality dimensions matter for climate policy outcomes. The main implication of our findings is that it could be fruitful to use more disaggregated democracy measures for the analysis of substantive research questions.

Suggested Citation

  • Romy Escher & Melanie Walter-Rogg, 2018. "Does the Conceptualization and Measurement of Democracy Quality Matter in Comparative Climate Policy Research?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 117-144.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v6:y:2018:i:1:p:117-144
    DOI: 10.17645/pag.v6i1.1187
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/1187
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17645/pag.v6i1.1187?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v6:y:2018:i:1:p:117-144. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira or IT Department (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.